File talk:Hebrew University Cornerstone laying in 1918.jpg

Copyright

@Yoavd: hi. I'm not a (c) specialist, but the Central Zionist Archives are charging for the use of the picture. You photographed a page from a book, this doesn't qualify you as the author. You should at least check what is written in the book's photo list. Sometimes the photographers of historical pictures are known and can be famous ones - or not, but still need to be mentioned, even if the reproduction rights are free. Appropriating a photo like this is not OK. Arminden (對話) 10:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: - We are talking about a photo taken in 1918. Under Israeli law it is public domain as I mentioned. I have no idea who took the photo, it was not mentioned. --Yoavd (對話) 16:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yoavd. I asked for advice and the best answer was this. In case it was archived already: You are right about the copyright. Writing "Own work" is incorrect and should be changed to "Unknown" or the actual author(s) should be credited if known.

I've done a bit of research and, apart from CZA, also HUJI is offering the photo here (right now the website seems to be under maintenance, but I've accessed it today, and Google shows the HUJI photo here), indicating as authors for the whole series "Strajmaster & Werner". Not helpful, as there seems to be an Alex(ander) Strajmayster (with an Y) who mainly worked for the JNF/KKL in the 1960s-70s, and none who left a trace until then. I could identify no Werner for that period. So possibly an archiving mistake. The American Colony – Photography Department has several pictures from the event, but not this one (see Library of Congress, Matson Collection). Unless HUJI or the Central Zionist Archives offer more in Hebrew, which I don't master, the search seems to stop here. Fact is that publications who used the file offered by HUJI did credit it to "The Hebrew University of Jerusalem/Strajmayster" (correctly, with an Y) such as here, and for another photo form the event here, in a HUJI (!) brochure. Only now do I feel that I've done my job regarding researching the credit. Historical photography, in Ottoman & Mandate Palestine, is a relevant and interesting encyclopedic topic by itself, apart from the (c) aspects.

I was told the he relevant regulation is "paragraph 21 of the British Copyright Act of 1911, as applicable under Israel's copyright statute of 2007 (see at Commons: Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Israel and Commons:Category:PD Israel & British Mandate)".

So, if you could please take it from here,

1. change "Own work" to either "Unknown" or "Strajmayster", as you see fit, and
2. look up on Google in Hebrew for "Hebrew University + "cornerstone" + "1918", with and w/o "Strajmayster" and "Strajmaster",

we could put this to bed with a good conscience.

Thank you and have a great day, Arminden (對話) 00:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: - I see that the author now is already Strajmayster, so I do not see what I can change. Anyway, I was told that if I take a photo, it is always my own work but I really do not mind that you change any detail that you want to whatever you want. My only goal was to enrich the commons, and not take credit for something that is due to someone else. Just a question - if I take a photo of the mona lisa - will it be my won work or I should mention Leonardo da Vinci? See for example [1] siting the author as Dennis Jarvis. By the way, here is the Israeli law: In the case of a photograph taken up to May 24, 2008 (and in general), the photograph is subject to the old Mandatory law, ie the copyright on it expires on January 1 of the 51st year after the photograph was created (section 78 (i) of the 2007 law) And section 21 of the old law).

So the copyright ended in the year 1968-1969, as it was taken in 1918. --Yoavd (對話) 09:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yoav. I know the argument from both sides. Of course it should be da Vinci. And add: reproduction by Yoav D. Very different from "own work", which means "author: Yoav". There is a profession, with high technical requirements, of reproducing works of art, with equipment costing thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, and those photographers still can't claim authorship, just "reproduction by...". It was somebody else who changed the authorship. Didn't ping me. When you upload more images, please do try your best to name the author. It is very important, as a useful information as much as a moral gesture. If you can, maybe you can fix older uploads, too. Autorship NEVER expires, even if reproduction rights do. And even those are sometimes extended by the legal heirs. If your father or grandfather was a famous photographer, your inheritance are not houses or oil paintings, but their archive. It wouldn't be right if you were taken that away by some law. See my point? Do you lose property rights 50 years after the date grandpa or grandma painted a picture valued 1M by Sotheby's? I don't think so, nor that you should. That's all. I won't argue over this, I'm very sure of it. If you chose to donate the rights to, say, the national library, I would applaud you, but I wouldn't force you to. Cheers, Arminden (對話) 15:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)